Today’s letters: How could the polls have been so wrong?

How could the Alberta polls been so wrong?

Re: Tories Rock Alberta (some editions), April 24.
How could the polls be so wrong for so long? A cynic might conclude that the Alberta Progressive Conservatives’ manipulated poll results as a strategic ploy to introduce fear, uncertainty and doubt of an impending Wildrose majority — so as to ensure voters would react by choosing the PCs. Emma Marsh, Red Deer, Alta.

Remember when you first watched Star Wars and Darth Vader and the Empire seemed unstoppable. Then at the last minute, Luke Skywalker pulls off a million-to-one shot and blows up the Death Star? That’s what it feels like in Alberta right now — if you didn’t vote for the Wildrose party. Sarah Stelfox, Calgary.

Re: Wildrose Changed Political Game, Andrew Coyne (some editions), April 24
Despite the caveats at beginning and end, Andrew Coyne’s column must be named the early frontrunner for the 2012 Dewey Beats Truman Award for Predictive Journalism.
At least Mr. Coyne has the perfectly valid excuse that he wrote his column before the polls closed. No such excuse is available for the CBC Alberta election team. They couldn’t recognize the stunning PC victory even as they were beaming it to the nation, remaining in denial for far too long that the results from the beginning were pointing to a huge PC win. One commentator continued to describe the evening as a “nailbiter” just before her colleague announced that other news organizations had called the PC majority victory. That’s when I changed the channel.
Despite this, I’ll continue to enjoy Mr. Coyne’s insights. Unless he’s basing them on polls. Don Sancton, Beaconsfield, Que.

It was delusional to believe that Wildrose — the least leftist party — would win Monday’s Alberta election. We live in a culture steeped in the belief that the role of government is to rob those who are creative, productive and responsible in order to reward those who are not, and call this inversion of justice “social responsibility” instead of theft. And no matter how much capitalism demonstrates its ability to improve our lives, and no matter how much socialism has demonstrated failure and social destruction, people will be guided by the fundamental ideas they have accepted.
Danielle Smith should be proud of doing as well as she has. As a lover of Alberta, I hope she persists in educating people about the proper function of government and weeds out the bigots and mystics in her party that become whipping boys and girls for the intellectually bankrupt left. Glenn Woiceshyn, Calgary.

Re: Time For Change, editorial, April 20.
Provincial Liberal leader Raj Sherman is a hero of the political process in Alberta. His courageous stance contributed immeasurably to the impetus for change within the provincial PC and, ironically, to the wave of awareness that cost his party so dearly in this election. I hope that Premier Alison Redford and her Progressive Conservative colleagues are aware that their mandate is, to no small extent, a gift from people like me whose votes spoke less to their support of the PCs than it did to their revulsion towards the Wildrose.
We have succeeded in keeping the shrill, simplistic and retrogressive Danielle Smith and her cohort from taking control of the provincial government. Willa Litvack, Calgary.

A sad day for Alberta & Ontario

Re: McGuinty Folds On Tax On The Rich; Tories Rock Alberta (some editions), both April 24.
Monday was a very depressing evening. Albertans manage to get frightened by the hidden agenda nonsense and Ontario lefties make a cozy deal. The two most important provinces in Canada get it all wrong and choose the Euro model. Basically it is spend all you want but make sure you pay lip service to balancing a budget. Steve Locke, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont.

Breaking his election promise not to raise taxes, and totally ignoring the Drummond Report by adding costly entitlement programs, Premier “Dad” McGuinty has shown clinging to power is more important to him than wrestling with Ontario’s out of control debt. Class warfare is his new approach to governing. Politically taxing the rich plays well, though it makes no economic sense, considering these people are the job creators. This group may now decide business opportunities are better elsewhere. Larry Comeau, Ottawa.

City’s elephants would rather be in California

Re: Zoo Loses Prestigious Accreditation, April 19.
On a trip to San Francisco/Oakland last month, I visited the PAWS sanctuary in California. It would be an outstanding home for any captive elephant, and certainly exceeds anything I have seen in any zoo, in North America or elsewhere. The three elephants now at the Toronto zoo would be very lucky indeed to make a new home there.
I have had the good fortune to be involved a long-term study of elephants in southern Kenya for the better part of the past 35 years. I am well aware of the needs of elephants for exercise, the stimulation of foraging challenges and the space to choose social partners.
The three African elephants currently at PAWS have formed their own social accommodations and are free to associate or isolate themselves as they choose.
There is every likelihood that the three Toronto elephants will both enrich the social lives of the current PAWS elephants, and find opportunities for enriching their own lives. In addition to the rolling grasslands and small lakes at PAWS, the elephants have a roomy, heated barn equipped with a large Jacuzzi pool.
PAWS is far and away the best place currently available in North America for any captive elephant. For this reason, the Toronto Zoo’s Toka, Thika and Iringa should have been moved a long time ago. Let’s hope it happens soon. Keith Lindsay, Amboseli Elephant Research Project, Nairobi, Kenya.

The situation with moving elephants from the Toronto zoo shows how misguided our city councillors are. In my opinion (I have been a zoo keeper for over 40 years) there should only be one councillor on the zoo’s board of directors. In that way, the other board members can make decisions for themselves without listening to special interest groups. Nubar Dakessian, Toronto.

During university, I spent summers working at the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums-accredited zoo in London, Ont. The animals were managed with shocking inexpertise and disregard. When a seal became pregnant, the pup drowned in front of local media as the pool hadn’t been properly prepared. The playful otters were kept in a cement cage the size of a minivan; one died and the other spent all of his time trying to escape. Toronto City council did the right thing by deciding to send the Toronto Zoo elephants to a sanctuary. If CAZPA is petulantly pulling its accreditation, good riddance. Rachel Plotkin, Toronto.

Thanks (not) for advice from failed politicians

Re: Quebec Will ‘Eventually’ Separate, Ignatieff Says, April 24.
We pause to remember a waylaid academic-turned-hapless politician. Time alone will tell if he was just a footnote in the history of the Liberal Party of Canada — or its footstone. Howard M. Greenfield, Montreal.

Michael Ignatieff was wrong about the war in Iraq and hopelessly wrong about trying to lead the Liberal party. Let’s hope he will prove as wrong in his predictions about the future of Scotland and Quebec as your paper’s advice (Time For Change, editorial, April 20) about the Wildrose party in Alberta. If you must publish Mr. Ignatieff’s musings, please tuck them on the back page, where they belong. Maxanne Ezer, Toronto.

Repeat offenders ought to be dealt with more harshly than first-timers, or so say the experts. Whether it’s International Development Minister Bev Oda’s unconscionable misuse of public funds to trump a pre-existing, five-star lifestyle or former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff’s persistent reliance on “blood and belonging” to justify his vision of Quebec’s predetermined sovereignty, one would think that history might have taught them a modicum of restraint, if not guided them toward sober re-evaluation.
Both have now violated their paroles and should be required to pay the price. I wonder what appropriate sentences the public will impose? Mark S. Rash, Winnipeg.

Re: A Canadian Way To Vote, Stéphane Dion, April 24.
Why is it that every time the Conservatives win a majority in an election, it is deemed as illegitimate by those on the left of the political spectrum and they call once again for a proportional voting system. Jean Chrétien won three straight majorities with popular votes that were either side of 40%, while the PC and Reform parties split about 35% of popular voting and finished well back. I don’t recall similar calls for proportional representation back then. If Canadians want a glimpse into the long-term effects of that scenario, they need only witness the current disaster that is Europe. Brad Williams, Manotick, Ont.

Stéphane Dion’s theories about the voting system show that we are fortunate that he is no longer in any position of influence. The trouble with all proportional ballot systems is that the least-preferred choice of the voter can eventually have the same weight as the most-preferred. A decimal voting system in which the voter assigns a numerical value to each candidate should be explored.
The function of the voting system is to select legislators, not to change the dynamics of inter-party relations. The influence of political parties in national affairs is already excessive Morris W. Dorosh, Toronto.

As an idea so stupid only an intellectual could believe it, Stéphane Dion’s “proportional-preferential-personalized vote” can be summed up in two words: (1) Ed (2) Stelmach. Alastair Gordon, Toronto.

Ethicists in the operating room

Re: Get Me An Ethicist, Stat, April 23.
Tom Blackwell’s article points to many dilemmas surrounding end-of-life issues. Halting proceedings to consult an ethicist could cause further health problems for the patient, as well as leading to legal suits against physicians. Not only that, but it will not necessarily solve the vital question: Who makes the decisions when a conflict exists between doctors and patient or the patient’s substitute decision makers? Urgent cases point to a need to have some form of advance directive or power of attorney.
Health-care personnel need more training in bioethics to become more familiar with working out these issues, and laypeople need to discuss these important issues well in advance of urgent problems arising. Our institute emphasizes that we should all talk with our families about these matters well in advance. Of course it’s not an easy discussion to have, but if we truly care for our families, why would we leave them in the dark about our health-care wishes?Moira McQueen, executive director, Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute; lecturer, Faculty of Theology, St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto.

Higher education’s commodification

Re: Students Should Pay Entire Tui­tion — Later, Andrew Coyne, April 21.
Andrew Coyne does not dispute that accessible education is a fundamental human right, but his assertion that there is “little correlation between tuition fees and access” to higher education ignores the realities of spending a lifetime burdened by student debt. Students should not be asked to mortgage their future to get an education, which is exactly what is being proposed here.
What goes unsaid is that student debt is a effective form of state oppression, an important factor not lost on Mr. Coyne and his ilk. Quebec students have bravely put themselves in harm’s way to counter the insidious commodification of education that Mr. Coyne proposes. So it is natural that he disparages them as a “self-dramatizing collection of idiots.”
The Quebec government wants to “bring the sacred cows [of government spending] to pasture,” as part of their austerity budget, according to the provincial Finance Minister Raymond Bachand. He is referring to accessible education, health care and other social programs, but a cursory look at federal and provincial politics reveals that the true sacred cows are multinational corporations, resource industries and financial interests.
People are starting to realize that the real problem behind the rising tuition fees and the commodification of education is the socioeconomic system that is behind it all. In other words, undergraduate tuition fees are an early introduction to the ugly realities of our neo-liberal economy. Max Pollack, Toronto.

We can’t judge past actions by today’s standards

Re: Culture, Statistics Back Up Churches, Barbara Kay, April 23.
I was a family physician in Toronto in the 1960s and delivered babies for many single mothers. I was connected with a for-profit, independent home in downtown Toronto. Everyone, including the mothers, were aware of what was going on. I looked after the mothers prenatally and during and after delivery with the same care and compassion given to any other mother. I do not feel that what I did was wrong. All the babies went to carefully selected homes. One of them became my godchild and I contact her regularly. Dr. Robert Stephens, Warkworth, Ont.

As much as we may wish the past had been different, we can’t change the realities of years past. What was provided for single mothers, and particularly for their babies, was all that seemed to be possible at that time. Thankfully, times and beliefs have changed . Margaret Clayton, Hudson, Que.

At last someone has had the nerve to write what lots of us over the age of 70 are thinking. It was not a question of choice in those days. The situation was one of desperation and that is why the need for assistance was filled by those who were in a position to do so. We cannot judge the past. Ankaret Dean, McDonald’s Corners, Ont.
.

.. but even then, forced adoption was wrong

Barbara Kay brilliantly described the social context of the 1950s that made forced adoptions possible. She remind us that the decade was not the rosy times embodied by the Cleavers but a time of forced conformity and a misguided sense of morality.
But it seems Ms. Kay is arguing for a moral relativism. Taking children away from their mothers was as wrong in the 1950s as it would be now. It is not about a revisionist sense of justice but a sense of justice. Period. The social structures of society are the majority of what made and makes being a single mother so challenging. Instead of working to change the oppressive policies and social climate of the 1950s like feminists of the day Simone De Beauvoir and Margaret Sanger, the United Churches in Canada did all they could to maintain the status quo. For this they are morally culpable. Daniel Martin, London, Ont.

Don’t bloody well read my emails

Re: Cameron Calls For Internet Surveillance, April 21.
Oi! David Cameron. Hold it a minute. In 1941, at the tender age of 16, one of your predecessors in the office of British prime minister asked me to sign the Official Secrets Act. Later, when I donned the King’s uniform, he also entrusted me with confidentiality. In fact, I believe I continue to be subject to secrecy till the day I die.
So, what’s all this about you wanting to hack into my emails and monitoring my activities on the Internet. Next, you’ll want to introduce a “spy” into the bowels of the Post Office prepared to open all my letters and parcels.
If terrorists want to advertise on the Internet, that’s their prerogative. If they wish to communicate with their colleagues via email surely they would not use plain language. Ever heard of encryption?
Mr. Cameron, check your job description. I am sure your terms of employment require you to concentrate on more progressive and productive matters. Len Green, Port Coquitlam, B.C.